Beussink+v.+Woodland

Brandon Beussink v. Woodland R-IV School District United State District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division December 28, 1998

Background: Brandon Beussink, in February 1998, created an Internet website. The website had vulgar language and his own personal opinion of different teachers and administrators. There was a section in which Beussink encouraged viewers to contact the school and linked the school’s website to his own page. Beussink’s friend, Amanda Brown accidentally came across the webpage and then showed it to a teacher, who then showed it to the principal of the school. Both faculty members became upset and the principal decided to punish Beussink by suspending him for 5 days. By the end of the day, the principal decided to lengthen to suspension from 5 to 10 days.

Decision and Rationale: Beussink claimed that the school district violated his First Amendment rights. His reasoning was that he was not on the school computer while loading information on the website or creating the site. The court said that Beussink was in more jeopardy of experiencing a hardship if the prosecution continued than that of the school. Beussink did receive the injunctive relief sought in the beginning of the case. The final decision was that the school district could not restrict Beussink from using his home computer to repost the homepage if he wanted to do so. It is not known if Beussink ever reposted any of the information contained on the webpage.

Impact on Education: Almost all students in today’s society have computers in their homes. If not, they students are usually easily within reach of accessing one. Technology is ever advancing daily and teachers should try to keep “up to date” with all the new “fads”. It is important to implement technology into the classroom in order to keep the students interested in instruction, but as educators we must be adamant about monitoring the Internet time in our classrooms. Unfortunately, many children make posts online about teachers and the students rely on messaging back and forth. As long as the students do not use the school technology to do this, I do not see where there is an issue. Of course, it would be hard to “deal” with something like these administrators, but kids will be kids.

Quiz Question: What does the First Amendment state? A. Right to bear arms B. Freedom of speech C. Right to wear red shoes D. Freedom to have a new hairstyle

Submitted by Jenna Bass

Submitted by Carrie Gossett Week 3 Case Brandon Beussink, by and through his parents and next friend v. Woodland R-IV School District Argued October 20, 1998  Decided December 28, 1998 **Background: **

A High School Junior named Brandon Beussink, create a web homepage where he exercised his First Amendment right, Freedom of Speech. The student’s web page was critical of Woodland High School and the staff. The page included crude and offensive language which was how the student felt at the time he created the page. The page was public but was not promoted to other students to view. The page also included a hyper-link allowing viewers to have direct link to Woodland High web site. The web page was created from the students home computer during has free time. The web page was shown to a teacher without Brandon’s permission by another student who became aware of the homepage because she was friends with Brandon. The student was upset with Brandon and set out to cause trouble for him. The student showed the web page to one of the teacher at the high school without Brandon’s permission or knowledge. The teacher was upset and offended by the content of the page, and contacted the school principal to inform him of the student’s page. The principal made the decision to order the student to remove the page and suspended the student from school. The suspended caused the student to fail classes and delay has graduation. The claim states that the student’s first amendment rights had been violated, because he voice has options and the school administers did not agree with how he viewed the school. **Decision and Rationale **: The court’s decision stated that the evidence presented shows that the homepage was created outside of school could not be censored, because the students’ option was not a favorable reflection of the school or the staff. The court made it clear that students do not discard their First Amendment rights at the school door. The right of all students is just that their right and entering a school building does not strip them of those rights. The school administrations have a responsible to all students’ safety and academic growth, but are limited when it causes students’ rights to be restricted. When a student’s option causes t disruptive or endangers the safety of other the school then may have the right to discipline a student per the school policy. The rationale is that students have right and even if you are a teacher that may not agree with a student’s option the law is very clear that a student’s rights have to be respected. **Impact on Teaching: **  The impact to teaching challenges teachers to be the guidance for students and to assist, but to allow their options and freedoms to be expressed all critical points of view may not always be favorable to others but even students the First Amendment right to express that opinion. Options are the freedoms that all people have, limited only by the understanding that it cannot cause others physical harm or danger. ** Quiz Question: **** A school cannot censure or discipline a student because of their critical option. True or false **